Lusardi v. U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center (USA)

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel determined that the Department of the Army engaged in “frequent, pervasive and humiliating,” gender-identity discrimination against Tamara Lusardi, a veteran and civilian Army software specialist who transitioned from male to female.

Lusardi was working in the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center (“AMRDEC”) in Redstone, Alabama. During transition, the Army improperly restricted her restroom usage, referred to her with male pronouns and by her birth name and stopped giving her work, the OSC said in a report.

Lusardi was also required to use a single-user, gender-neutral restroom, out of concerns that Female employees might feel “uncomfortable” sharing a restroom with her.

The OSC, a federal investigative and prosecutorial agency, said that Female coworker preferences alone “cannot justify discriminatory working conditions,” since it could reinforce the very stereotypes and biases that nondiscrimination laws are intended to protect against. According to the report, Lusardi should be able to use bathrooms designated for her gender identity.

2 thoughts on “Lusardi v. U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center (USA)”

“Lusardi was also required to use a single-user, gender-neutral restroom, out of concerns that other employees might feel “uncomfortable” sharing a restroom with her.”

An excellent job of erasing the female sex entirely….

Question:

Was he still pre-op when he was required to use a single-user, gender-neutral restroom? This is a very important question that they intentionally disregard.

When they say, “employees”, what “employees” are they talking about? What they really mean is female employees. Women have a basic human right to privacy. This is a biological male, and if he still had his penis then, he has no right to be in a women’s restroom. It’s not very complicated at all. If he still has his male genitalia, he needs to stay out of the women’s restroom. When he can prove that he had surgery, hormones, etc., perhaps then. Until then, stay out of the women’s restroom.

There is no way of proving that his “gender identity” is more important than a female employee’s basic human right to privacy and dignity.

There is also the issue of sexual harassment. If a male employee repeatedly walked into a women’s restroom causing women to feel insecure and embarrassed, it could be construed as a form of sexual harassment. It’s oppressive for females to undergo this humiliation. This individual started his career as a male soldier, and is now working for a defense contractor. Female employees recognized him as male, and now they have to automatically shut all their feelings and emotions down, and suddenly pretend that he is just “one of the girls” now. Of course, they are going to feel awkward when a person they recognized as male is now allowed into women’s restrooms.

I don’t believe transgender identified persons should be fired or discriminated against just because they identify as transgender. Having said this, females have a basic human right to privacy and dignity. The issue of biological males in women’s restroom, locker rooms, etc. will NOT go away any time soon.

“The OSC, a federal investigative and prosecutorial agency, said that Female coworker preferences alone “cannot justify discriminatory working conditions,” since it could reinforce the very stereotypes and biases that nondiscrimination laws are intended to protect against”

How is it “discriminatory” to tell male employees to either use the men’s restroom, or a single-user, gender neutral restroom? They are essentially telling women that they have to get used to intact biological males in women’s restrooms. This individual certainly looks male. He is male, and has no inherent right to use a women’s restroom.

(1.) PENIS IN A WOMEN’S RESTROOM IS NOT A CIVIL RIGHT. IT’S VIOLATING THE PRIVACY RIGHTS OF WOMEN.

(2.) “GENDER IDENTITY” LAWS CODIFY SEX BASED STEREOTYPES INTO LAW. IT’S SEX DISCRIMINATION ON ITS FACE. Try explaining “gender identity” to someone without resorting to culturally defined characteristics that society deems are “feminine”. What does “feeling like a woman” mean?

He is not a woman anyway because no primate, human or non-human, can really change its sex. Calling this individual “her” doesn’t change the fact that this person is male and always will be male. Since it’s biologically impossible for any primate to change its sex, it should be illegal for anyone to change his or her sex. In my opinion, the only people who should be allowed to legally change their sex are individuals with disorders of sexual development (intersex). DSD are not the same as transgender.

Again, I don’t believe that any person who identifies as transgender should be discriminated in employment, but this still doesn’t resolve the real issue of privacy rights for female employees.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel determined that the Department of the Army engaged in “frequent, pervasive and humiliating,” gender-identity discrimination against Tamara Lusardi.

“Frequent, pervasive and humiliating,” gender-identity discrimination occurs in the military all the time.

According to the Pentagon’s own research, more than 1 in 4 women who join the military will be sexually assaulted during their careers. Since “gender identity” is now the same as biological sex, then this is rampant discrimination based gender identity. If 1 in 4 women who join the military will be sexually assaulted during their careers, logic tells us that a lot of these women will have PTSD. It’s no secret that many defense contractors hire vets. Why should female veterans who have been sexually assaulted be forced to share a restroom with a biological male?